A. G. v. The City of Statesville

• Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
• Decided: January 11, 2021
• Docket: 5:20-cv-00165
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-165-KDB-DCK A. G., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) THE CITY OF STATESVILLE, MICHAEL ) FATTALEH, WILLIAM MANNERS ) IREDELL-STATESVILLE BOARD OF ) EDUCATION, and COLLEEN GUERIN ) a/ka/ COLLEEN FLOOD, ) ) Defendants. ) )

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT regarding “Defendant Iredell-Statesville Board Of Education’s Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint” (Document No. 19) filed December 4, 2020. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, the record, and applicable authority, the undersigned will direct that the pending motion to dismiss be denied as moot. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 applies to the amendment of pleadings and allows a party to amend once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving, or “if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1). Rule 15 further provides: (2) Other Amendments. In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires. Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2). The undersigned notes Plaintiffs “First Amended Complaint” (Document No. 24) filed January 8, 2021, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15, as well as this Court’s “Order” (Document No. 23). It is well settled that a timely-filed amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that motions directed at superseded pleadings may be denied as moot. Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001) (“The general rule ... is that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, rendering the original pleading of no effect.”); see also, Fawzy v. Wauquiez Boats SNC, 873 F.3d 451, 455 (4th Cir. 2017) (“Because a properly filed amended complaint supersedes the original one and becomes the operative complaint in the case, it renders the original complaint ‘of no effect.’”). To the extent any Defendant contends the Amended Complaint is deficient, this Order is without prejudice to Defendant(s) filing a renewed motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint, as appropriate. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Defendant Iredell-Statesville Board Of Education’s Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint” (Document No. 19) is DENIED AS MOOT. SO ORDERED.

Signed: January 11, 2021 DCm David C. Keesler ey United States Magistrate Judge af